Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
3,350
result(s) for
"Justification (Ethics)"
Sort by:
Deciphering moral intuition: How agents, deeds, and consequences influence moral judgment
Moral evaluations occur quickly following heuristic-like intuitive processes without effortful deliberation. There are several competing explanations for this. The ADC-model predicts that moral judgment consists in concurrent evaluations of three different intuitive components: the character of a person (Agent-component, A); their actions (Deed-component, D); and the consequences brought about in the situation (Consequences-component, C). Thereby, it explains the intuitive appeal of precepts from three dominant moral theories (virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism), and flexible yet stable nature of moral judgment. Insistence on single-component explanations has led to many centuries of debate as to which moral precepts and theories best describe (or should guide) moral evaluation. This study consists of two large-scale experiments and provides a first empirical investigation of predictions yielded by the ADC model. We use vignettes describing different moral situations in which all components of the model are varied simultaneously. Experiment 1 (within-subject design) shows that positive descriptions of the A-, D-, and C-components of moral intuition lead to more positive moral judgments in a situation with low-stakes. Also, interaction effects between the components were discovered. Experiment 2 further investigates these results in a between-subject design. We found that the effects of the A-, D-, and C-components vary in strength in a high-stakes situation. Moreover, sex, age, education, and social status had no effects. However, preferences for precepts in certain moral theories (PPIMT) partially moderated the effects of the A- and C-component. Future research on moral intuitions should consider the simultaneous three-component constitution of moral judgment.
Journal Article
Justice, democracy and the right to justification : Rainer Forst in dialogue
\"Over the past 15 years, Rainer Forst has developed a fundamental research programme within the tradition of Frankfurt School Critical Theory. The core of this programme is a moral account of the basic right of justification that humans owe to one another as rational beings. This account is put to work by Forst in articulating - both historically and philosophically - the contexts and form of justice and of toleration. The result is a powerful theoretical framework within which to address issues such as transnational justice and multicultural toleration. In this volume, Forst sets out his ideas in an extended essay, which is responded to be influential interlocutors including: Andrea Sangiovanni, Amy Allen, Kevin Olson, Anthony Laden, Eva Erman and Simon Caney. The volume concludes with Forst's response to his interlocutors\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
Toleration, power and the right to justification
Rainer Forst's Toleration in Conflict (published in English 2013) is the most important historical and philosophical analysis of toleration of the past several decades. Reconstructing the entire history of the concept, it provides a forceful account of the tensions and dilemmas that pervade the discourse of toleration. In his lead essay for this volume, Forst revisits his work on toleration and situates it in relation to both the concept of political liberty and his wider project of a critical theory of justification. Interlocutors Teresa M. Bejan, John Horton, Chandran Kukathas, Daniel Weinstock, Melissa S. Williams, Patchen Markell and David Owen then critically examine Forst's reconstruction of toleration, his account of political liberty and the form of critical theory that he articulates in his work on such political concepts. The volume concludes with Forst’s reply to his critics.
eBook
Justification and emancipation : the critical theory of Rainer Forst
\"A collection of essays on the work of German political theorist Rainer Forst, covering subjects such as justice, toleration, and the critique of power from within a normative theory of justice and law\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
Should healthcare professionals sometimes allow harm? The case of self-injury
This paper considers the ethical justification for the use of harm minimisation approaches with individuals who self-injure. While the general issues concerning harm minimisation have been widely debated, there has been only limited consideration of the ethical issues raised by allowing people to continue injuring themselves as part of an agreed therapeutic programme. I will argue that harm minimisation should be supported on the basis that it results in an overall reduction in harm when compared with more traditional ways of dealing with self-injurious behaviour. It will be argued that this is an example of a situation where healthcare professionals sometimes have a moral obligation to allow harm to come to their patients.
Journal Article
Constitutionalism justified : Rainer Forst in discourse
\"Rainer Forst is a leading German political philosopher and was named \"the most important political philosopher of his generation\" upon his 2012 receipt of the Leibniz Prize. This book brings together discussion from political philosophy, constitutional theory, and legal philosophy to examine Forst's theory of justice, paying special attention to the application of his moral theory to legal fields. Forst then responds to his interlocutors in a concluding chapter. The book is structured from the general to the specific, and begins by examining Forst's \"right to justification\" as the basis for justice. This right is in the second section extended to the realm of constitutional theory. The third section addresses justification and proportionality within constitutional law. The concluding section sees Forst respond to the foregoing chapters\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
Religion, Extraction, and Just Transition in Appalachia
This paper employs approaches from religious studies and Appalachian studies to examine the history, influence, and future of a multifaceted ethos of extraction, particularly as it influences the coal industry, in the Appalachian region of the United States. While many studies of extraction and the coal industry focus on their economic and political dimensions, by examining a broader ethos of extraction, this paper highlights multiple religious influences, including the entanglements between religious communities and extraction-based industries, the powerful moral narratives that serve to interpret and justify extraction, and the dynamics involved in shaping local identities and perceptions of place that enable this ethos to influence post-coal transition efforts. The result is a broad survey of the influences and impacts of resource extraction in Appalachia that challenges many of the longstanding stereotypes that can still be commonly found deployed about the region. In examining these influences, the paper also describes how academic interpreters have helped to shape popular conceptions of the Appalachian region that ultimately support ongoing extractive practices. Building upon insights from grassroots, anti-extractive activist communities in the region, the paper concludes by suggesting some ways that academics might adopt restorative ethics and practices in their work to address the entanglements between extractive scholarship and exploitation and devise alternative paths for just futures.
Journal Article